Hi Tore,
I also note that the Impact Analysis warns that this policy may lead to increased fees for members, which would be an undesirable consequence. I don't feel that the members should be sponsoring the non-members; equal access to addresses from the last /8 should mean equal monetary contribution to the NCC.
Does that mean that you want the sponsored PI assignments get the same cost as a direct assignment (1300 euro yearly maintenance per object) ?
Yes, something along those lines would be good.
Perhaps an easier way of dealing with something like a price point or cost in that case, is to not allow LIR Sponsored IPv4 PI from the last /8. Which would result in only having the option of either becoming a LIR or sign a direct end-user agreement with RIPE. Regards, Erik